I was implying that x and y were nouns, h f g verbs.
assuming that x g y produces a noun (almost
guaranteed)
then is:
(h x f@:g y) -: (h f) (x g y) -: (x g y) h (f (x g y))
>>>
I'd have expressed your identity as
(h x f@:g y) -: (h f) (x g y)
since that better captures the niceties of J's
formalisms.
And, yes, expressed this way (with the stipulation
that h, x, f, g and y are all verbs) you've got a
tautology.
__________________________________________________________
Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
